Full text of "Food news for consumers"

See other formats

Historic, Archive Document

Do not assume content reflects current
scientific knowledge, policies, or practices.

IvOOD'M

FOR CONSUMERS

United States Department of Agriculture Volume 4 Number 2 Summer 1987

Com

porfe chop?

Biotech Hits Flies Kids Learn

Meat and Poultry Menace Food to Read Thermometers

FOOD
NEWS

FOR CONSUMERS

Summer 1987
Vol. 4, No. 2

Contents of this magazine are
intended for re-use. No permission
is necessary.

This magazine is published by the U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Food Safety
and Inspection Service.

Administrator

Donald L. Houston

Director, Information
and Legislative Affairs

Nancy Robinson

Chief, Information Branch

Karen Stuck

Editor

Mary Ann Parmley
(202) 447-9113

Production

Maxine Grant

Marketing

Laura Fox

Art Director

Deborah Taylor

Cover Illustration

Richard Thompson

Photography

Yuen-Gi Yee
Lester Shepard

Food for News Consumers is pub-
lished four times a year. Subscription
price is $9-50 (domestic) or $1 1.90
(foreign) per year. Send subscription
orders tO: Superintendent of Docu-
ments, U.S. Government Printing
Office, Washington, D.C. 20402. Send
comments and inquiries tO: Editor,
Food News for Consumers. FSIS/ILA,
Room 1160 South, U.S. Department
of Agriculture, Washington, D.C.
20250. Telephone: (202) 447-9113.

Ask the Consumer Advisor

Dear Consumer Advisor:

I'm trying to cut down on the cholesterol in my
diet. What is USDA doing to help people hke
me?

Dear Reader:

You're right to be concerned about cholesterol in
your diet. In fact, avoiding a diet high in fat, satu-
rated fat, and cholesterol is one of the seven
major dietary guidehnes recently issued by the
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Lower-
ing your blood cholesterol level is a good way to
help lower your chances of having a heart attack.

We at USDA are committed to helping consumers control cholesterol intake. We're
encouraging the addition of cholesterol information on labels for meat and
poultry — products under our jurisdiction. We are also working with industry to
develop new food items that are lower in fat and cholesterol.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which oversees food items other
than meat and poultry, recently proposed some rules on cholesterol labeling. We
are working with them as they put these regulations into final form. As has
always been our pohcy, we will closely follow the new FDA rules on labeling,
since it's good to have consistent labehng requirements for all food.

One of our concerns about cholesterol information on labels is the health claims
that may result. When is a claim accurate and fair? That's a question a group
of policymakers — I'm part of this group— is looking into. Health information is
useful to consumers, but only if it's not misleading.

We will continue to work to further educate consumers on the relationship
between reducing cholesterol in the diet and health. Also, we will meet regularly
with representatives from various pubhc health professional and consumer groups
to coordinate information efforts. It's important that the message people hear
from all trusted sources is consistent.

Sincerely,

ANN COLLINS CHADWICK, Director
Office of the Consumer Advisor
Phone: (202) 382-9681

FOOD NEWS FOR CONSUMERS/SUMMER 1987

FOOD NEWS FOR CONSUMERS

CONTENTS

Consumer Education

Hotline Calling— Clearing Up Those Food Handling
Myths

Just Because Aunt Molly did it that way doesn't

mean it's right or safe p.4

Food Safety

The Housefly and Food— A Dirty Story but Someone

Had to TeU It

Learn to protect yourself against the insect that
carries much of the world's communicable disease p.6

Special Features

Summer Recipes "Sizzle" With Food Safety Information
We just thought of it— Why not write food
safety into recipes? p.8

Biotech— What's on the Horizon for Meat and Poultry?
Farmers, ranchers, consumers and certainly
the pharmaceutical industry will profit from
genetic engineering p. 10

Hea/tfi and Nutrition

Our fun summer quiz: What Are Americans Eating?

Rate Yourself as a Trend-spotter p. 12

News Wires

No More Secrets in Sulfite LabeUng p. 13

Listeria Linked to Raw Vegetables p. 13

Processed Orange Juice May Soon Taste

"Fresh-Squeezed" p. 14

The Children's Page

Read Any Good Thermometers Lately?

Your child or class can learn to read a fever

thermometer, check the roast for doneness and

make sure the refrigerator is functioning safely p. 14

FOOD NEWS FOR CONSUMERS/SUMMER 1987

Consumer
Education

Hotline Calling-
Clearing up Those
Food "Myths"

levels in the 8 to 10 hours the food
would stand at room temperature be-
fore the oven automatically starts cook-
ing. Since perishable products shouldn't
remain at room temperature over 2
hours, use the time bake feature for
these foods only when you can put
them in the oven within that safe
period.

Food handling practices are often
ingrained in family tradition. One isn't
quite sure how they got started or why —
that's just the way to do it. New addi-
tives and appliances also inspire new
myths. Our USDA hotline home econ-
omists know every day will bring a vari-
ety of "myth" calls. It could be that
mom swears by cooling her casserole on
the counter, or the neighbor is sure
there are worms in hotdogs. It will help
a lot, we think, to clear up some of
these tales we hear on the hotline,
800-535-4555.

Q; My new oven has a time-bake
feature. I can put pork chops in before
work in the morning and the oven will
turn on at 4 p.m. to cook the chops by
the time I get home at 5 p.m. Isn't this
great?

A: while in theory this may seem to
be a good way to have a hot dinner
waiting when you arrive home, it could
be very dangerous. Why? Because bac-
teria in raw meat and poultry products
can easily multiply to disease-causing

Q: I read a recipe for preparing turkey
that called for cooking the bird at 250°
F for 12 hours. Sounds like a great way
to get tender meat, but is it safe?

A: Many callers hope they can save
themselves from an early awakening on
a special holiday by cooking the turkey
overnight at a low temperature. This
method is not recommended.

Because of the low oven temperature
and the large volume of a turkey —
especially with stuffing, your food
might take over 4 hours to reach a high
enough temperature to destroy bacteria.
Therfore it could be unsafe to eat.

The quality of the meat might suffer,
too, since during prolonged cooking
some areas would tend to become dry.

In short, we don't recommend cook-
ing meat or poultry at oven tempera-
tures below 325° F

Qr Lately, every time I prepare
chicken thighs or legs, the area near the
bone stays dark red. I know I've cooked
it long enough. Why isn't the meat
done?

A: Very hkely the meat is done. The
color difference you're seeing may be
due to the fact that chickens are now
marketed at seven to nine weeks of age.
In these young chickens, the bones
are porous and cooking can draw out
red pigment from the bone marrow.
This stains the flesh. The positive side
is that this probably means you have a
more tender chicken.

Q: I completely thawed a beef roast
in the refrigerator, then was invited out
to dinner. Have I wasted my roast now
that I won't have time to cook it for sev-
eral days?

A: No. Your roast can be saved. As
long as food is handled properly, re-
freezing is perfectly safe. Since your
roast was thawed in the refrigerator,
its's fine to pop it back in the freezer.

Be aware, though, that repeated freez-
ing and thawing will lower the quahty
of the food. When faced with the
choice, however, of a slight quality loss
due to refreezing or losing something
completely to spoilage, it's wise to opt
for refreezing.

Q: Every now and then I notice that
ham slices have a greenish, iridescent
look. Does that mean the ham is
spoiled?

A: No. As long as it's just a greenish
color and not mold caused by spoil-
age, it is a perfectly safe and natural
condition.

Like the "rainbow-effect" you see
when oil spreads on a rain puddle,
sometimes the natural fat and water in
ham create a similar reaction. This often
happens in roast beef slices too.

Q: I accidentaly left my scalloped
potatoes in the oven all night. The oven
was turned off and the dish was cov-
ered. Won't reheating kill any bacteria
that may have grown during that time?

A: Unfortunately it would not be safe
to serve your casserole. While cooking

FOOD NEWS FOR CONSUMERS/SUMMER 1987

does kill most bacteria, there are food
poisoners that are not destroyed by
ordinary cooking. The combination of
many hours and the warm atmosphere
of the oven would provide an excellent
growing ground for them.

Since you can't be sure of the bacte-
rial level in the scalloped potatoes, it's
best not to take a chance.

Qs Yuck! My neighbor just told
me that an ingredient in hot dogs —
erythorbate— is really earthworms. Is
that true?

A: No. And the origin of this myth is
impossible to trace! Actually, erythor-
bate is a safe substance used in the
curing of hotdogs and bacon. Chemi-
cally, it's closely related to vitamin C.

So, it's a helpful food additive, has
nothing whatever to do with worms,
and is as safe as the vitamin C tablet
you swallowed this morning.

Q; Please settle a family debate. I al-
ways cool my lasagna casserole com-
pletely on the counter before putting
it into the refrigerator or freezer. My
mother-in-law says that isn't safe. Who's
right?

A: Your mother-in-law makes good
food safety sense. The types of bacteria
that can cause food poisoning grow best
at room temperature and slightly above.
The longer the casserole remains in this
temperature danger zone, the more
chance trouble has to "brew". Plus,
you might forget about your casserole
completely, as our callers often do.

Refrigerate any cooked product as
quickly as possible. Where practical,
divide the food into smaller, more
sallow containers so it can cool
quickly. The warm foods shouldn't
affect the efficiency of your refrigerator

— Susan Templin

In A Stew Over
Food Safety?

Call the USDA Meat
and Poultry Hotline
for food safety facts.

800-535-4555 Washington, DC 447-3333
10:00 am-4:00 pm Eastern Time

Professional home economists will answer your
questions about proper handling of meat and poultry,
how to tell if it is safe to eat, and how to better
understand meat and poultry labels.

A Dubllc service of this publication and the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

FOOD NEWS FOR CONSUMERS/SUMMER 1987

The Housefly—
A Dirty Story But
Someone Had To
Tell It

by Arthur Whitmore

The housefly is such a familiar sight
that you swat one away from your
sandwich without a second thought.
But while the fly looks innocuous, it is
one of our most dangerous enemies.

Bacteriologists tell us the housefly's
global distribution and disease-carrying
capability make it a real international
superpower when it
comes to transmit-
ting human
illness.
From
time im-
memo-
rial,
says
Dr. Bon-
nie Rose,
a USDA bacteri-
ologist in Beltsville,
Md., the fly has transmitted
a wide variety of disease around the
world. In the category of foodborne
illness, these include dysentary,
salmonellosis, typhoid fever, cholera
and some parsitic diseases.

The reason is simple. "The common
housefly and a number of its 'cousins'
are famous for their fllthy habits," says
Dr. Rose.

Born in Filth, A housefly begins its
life in ftlth. An adult female seeks out
fresh manure, garbage or fermenting
vegetable waste in which to lay its eggs.

The female deposits a hundred or
more eggs in one batch. She may lay 2
to 21 batches during her life, which
could last a month or so.

Fly larvae — or maggots — hatch 1 or
2 days after the eggs are laid, and begin
to feed on the material around them.

Within a week or two. the larvae

have grown, shed
their skins
twice
and
bur-
rowed
into the
earth
beneath
the

garbage
or manure.
There they
change into pupae,
from which the adult flies emerge a
few days later.

Spreading Disease. Adult houseflies
begin their search for food within an
hour or two after emerging from the pu-
pal state. They are drawn by smell to
human food and to garbage and feces.

A housefly eats using its proboscis—
an elongated mouth organ which func-
tions like a straw— to suck in liquified
organic material. A fly can also eat solid
food by regurgitating certain digestive
juices— called vomitus— onto the solid
food's surface, softening a portion of
it. and then sucking it back through the
proboscis.

As a housefly treks across waste or
garbage in its search for food, it can pick
up bacteria and other germs on its feet,
the hairs of its legs and its probiscis. It
can also ingest disease organisms and
carry them in the digesive tract.

The fly can later deposit these organ-
isms on human food, either from its
feet, legs and mouth parts, or through
its vomitus and feces.

Danger for Developing Nations.

The housefly's disease-transmitting
ability makes it an extraordinary pub-
lic health hazard for many developing
nations.

In countries where
open
sewers
and
privies

are
stiU
common,
houseflies
and related flies

continually infect the human popula-
tion with disease.

The flies feed or breed in human fe-
ces, pick up disease organisms that have
passed into the sewage from infected
individuals, and then re-transmit those
disease organisms to local water and
food supplies. Thus, the flies sustain an
ongoing cycle of infection.

According to the U.S Centers for
Disease Control in Atlanta, much sick-
ness in developing areas is due to
fly-borne bowel disease, as are a large
number of deaths in children under two
years of age.

Our Domestic Fly Problem, In the

United States today, disease transmis-
sion by houseflies and related flies is
limited in most areas by closed sewer
systems and relatively good sanitary
practices. Historically, though, we had
our own problems.

In the horse-and-buggy era most
Americans tolerated flies as an unavoid-
able nuisance. Why? Well, they were vir-
tually inescapable. Many people had
privies in the backyard, relied on horses
for transportation and kept livestock.

Fly breeding was so intense in
manure that ordinances were finally
passed in urban areas prohibiting the
use of privies or the keeping of livestock
inside city limits.

Conditions improved for a time
when automobiles replaced horses on
the street, but the migration of people
from rural areas and other countries to
U.S. cities in the 1920s and 30s soon
created new problems.

As urban living quarters became in-
creasingly crowded, environmental san-
itation reached a low ebb. Refuse accu-
mulated and the fly problem again
became acute.

Insecticides were then introduced to
control flies, and worked fairly well for
some years. But, as the insects devel-
oped resistance to the chemicals, it be-
came increasingly obvious that sanita-
tion and refuse control would remain
the primary inhibitors.

Proper Refuse Disposal = Fewer
Flies. It's now an axiom with public
health workers that proper refuse and
waste disposal are the best way to

FOOD NEWS FOR CONSUMERS/SUMMER 1987

control flies.

In the past, open dumps contributed
significantly to fly problesm in the
United States. Thanks to local and
federal efforts over the past few de-
cades, however, most U.S. towns and
cities now dispose of refuse in sani-
tary landfills.

At a properly managed sanitary
landfill, refuse is compacted and then
covered with 6 or more inches of earth
daily. This makes it impossible for flies
to feed or deposit larvae in the refuse.

Refuse should also be collected from
homes and other premises at regular in-
tervals to prevent fly larvae in garbage
cans and bulk containers from migrat-
ing out to pupate in the ground nearby.
In general, garbage should be collected
weekly from residences and daily from
commercial establishments like hotels
and restaurants.

Shoo Fly,
Don't Bother

Me. You

can take
steps to
control house-
flies in and
around your home

—Use your garbage
disposal for meat and
vegetable waste. A

garbage compactor
can help too. It pack-
ages garbage so as to
reduce the fly's access
to it.

—Keep garbage and
other refuse properly bagged
and under cover. Place all garbage
in plastic bags. Cans should have
tight-fltting lids. Keep the cans and
the area where they're stored dean
and tidy. And don't let garbage stand
until it ferments. Ask for frequent
pickups.

—Disposal of animal excrement
promptly and properly. Bury or oth-
erwise dispose of dog, cat and other ani-
mal feces. Don't leave pet food outside

uneaten either.

—Inspect your screens. Both
window and door screens should
flt tighdy. More tips: You need
screens with at least 14 meshes
per inch to stop house flies, and
screen doors should swing out
so flies resting on the door

Dive-bomber

The housefly can strafe food with
contagion. One study showed a single fly
carrying some 6 million bacteria on
the outside and nearly 25 million inside
its body.

proboscis

feet

leg hairs

don't auto-
matically come in
when you open the door.

—Spraying. To kill flies quickly
inside the home, use a household
aerosol insecticide spray. Buy a reputa-
ble brand and foUow the directions
carefufly. Avoid prolonged exposure to
skin or breathing large amounts of the
mist. Don't spray near an open flame,
and take care not to contaminate food,
dishes and food-preparation utensfls
and surfaces with the insecticide.

—Preparing food. While flxing and
serving meals, keep food covered or in
the refrigerator. If you're serving out-
doors, plastic wrap can protect your
food. A screened-in porch or patio can
also protect your meal from hungry
flies.

If, despite your best efforts, you see
a fly land on the potato salad, scoop out
that portion and toss it in the trash.

When aU else fails, that's one sure
way of saying 'buzz-off" to what the fly
can do to you or your family's health.

—Arthur Whitmore, who holds
aB.S. in science
writing from the
University of
Maryland, has
served for
two years
as a pubhc
affairs
speciahst
in USD As
news
division.

FOOD NEWS FOR CONSUMERS/SUMMER 1987

Special
Features

Summer Recipes
"Sizzle" When You
Add Food Safety
Information

by Mary Ann Parmley and
Dr. Georgia Stevens Neruda

Have you ever thought how helpful
it would be to put safe food handling
tips right into your recipes?

It's easily one of the best ways to get
the message out, and people wanthebp.
Over 70 percent of callers to USDA's
Meat and Poultry HotUne ask for basic
food handling advice.

Summer's the perfect time to start
this new approach. As you know, food
poisoning is a bigger problem in warm
weather. And food poisoning is on
the rise right now in general. Last
year listeria, salmonella, even cholera
claimed lives across the country in sepa-
rate, serious outbreaks.

Sometimes these problems begin in
plants and restaurants, but more
often— public health research shows—
dangerous food handling practices occur
at home.

In an important 1985 study of Ore-
gon home food preparers*, investigator
Dr. Margy Woodburn found a high
percentage of home "chefs" consistently
making basic food preparation mistakes
of the kind that could cause illness.

How do food preparers
go wrong?

Generally speaking, people fixing food
at home make mistakes of a very basic
nature. Therefore, to help correct the
situation, we've worked up Six Com-
mandments of Basic Food Safety.

* Woodburn & VanDeRiet — Safe
Food: Care Labeling for Perishable
Foods, HOME ECONOMICS RESEARCH
JOURNAL. Sept. 1985, Vol. 14, No. 1.

These rules are repeated in the recipes
on the opposite page.

1. Keep it safe, refrigerate. Refrigerate
foods you'U use quickly. Freeze raw
meat or poultry you can't use in 1 or 2
days. Freezer should register 0° F;
refrigerator, 40° F.

2. Don't thaw food on the kitchen
counter. Bacteria multiply rapidly at
room temperature.

3. Wash hands and utensils after
contact with raw meat and poultry.

Wash cutting boards or other work
surfaces too. Bacteria, often present on
raw foods, can spread to other foods
if you don't.

4. Never leave perishable food out
over 2 hours.

5. Thoroughly cook raw meat, poul-
try and fish. Most bacteria die at
160° F or above.

6. Freeze or refrigerate leftovers
promptly. To re-use. reheat leftovers
to bubbling— about 185° F. Previously
cooked and stored food is highly
vulnerable to spoilage and food
poisoning.

How do recipe editors go
wrong?

Here are a few "red flags" you can be
alert for in evaluating recipes. For safe-
ty's sake, please:

1. Don't recommend that people
marinate meat or poultry on the coun-
tertop. Since most marinating takes
several hours, it should occur in a
glass pan in the refrigerator.

2. Don't recommend
partial cooking. If
you bake a roast

minutes, put it on the counter to steep
in spices for an hour, then put it back
to finish baking, bacteria can grow
while it's partially heated and sitting
out. Worse, some bacteria and food
poisons won't be killed by the 2nd
baking.

3. Don't recommend low-temperature,
long-time cooking. Recipes that for
convenience or to "tenderize" call for
baking perishable foods all night or all
day at low temperatures can promote
bacterial growth.

Crockpot cooking also requires care.
Suggest people thaw food before putting
it in the pot. They mustn't overload the
pot either. Food above the cooking line
won't be safe. Further, because of its de-
lay in coming to safe, high heating tem-
peratures, the crockpot isn't suitable for
reheating leftovers.

4. Please do recommend safe food han-
dling for picnics and barbeques. Sum-
mer's fresh fruits and vegetables must
be thoroughly washed— both to remove
bacteria and pesticide residues— before
use.

Raw meat, poultry and fish need
careful handUng at the grill. It's best to
use two separate paper plates for these
items. One plate for the raw product
and a fresh plate to take up the cooked
version. That way. bacteria don't spread
from raw to cooked. People should
clean utensils and hands too after work-
ing with raw meat.

poultry
or fish and
before working with
vegetables or other foods.

Now that you have the basics, take
a look at how our Meat and Poultry
Hotline home economists have edited
(words in green) these USDA recipes to
add food safety advice.

And here's a final hint. Dr. Woodburn
found that her Oregon study subjects
responded to food safety advice best
when it was short and to the point.
That probably sums up the human re-
sponse to instructions of any kind.

FOOD NEWS FOR CONSUMERS/SUMMER 1987

^ 2 £ B

^ O C n

! S 5- I

- ^ - 3

^1 §- §
I- § s

M O ^ —

II I

O n

C M Ijj

o IS
c 3 a

6» g >l M

E? n S"-

g rD O M

g 3 n D- W ^"

8^ ^-S

8 Q g 5"
3 S Q ^ S

^ n 3 ^

Is S 2.

3 "1.

0. JT

re o
bt <

« <

<6 ft) n D
5 Ci. ?r n
C OQ^OQ n

5 ^ § 5

g IT) S 3

^i.c^

3 f5 ^

n n n

OP ft

3 ^.

fP . fD

, , ft; — 3

Ul S ft)

3^S.g
3 c P 3

n 3

111
S S 1

: 5 &

S3
?! 3-

> »

CO
CD

Cr
O
C

€

o
:3-

n Sr
n

STB

^ s:
S.S

3 OQ
3- ^
O ^
3 rt

3
&)
3

o
o

3-
3'

0 rD
C ft)

3 i2
o

^ I

M O
ft) s
OQ

< 21 21

ft ft CD
OQ hO

K o o

o o

f=r 3 3

M izi on CO

►T3 ^3

O O

3 3

^ Co

CD C

- a.

ft) o* O

a.?^3

R 2;

CQ
Co

O)
Cr
O
c

CD
O)

CD
Q)
O

jg G n

S-S 3 2
« B* X

5 O OQ

« o. S cr
f? c ELv^*

^ £L yi ST ^ :^ P

g 3 c

^ CD

CD ft*

3n t;
ft,

£; M OQ

3 c? K '

a- !^ n
m o ■
3

- n 75

^3 < «

X 3 ^ ^

< CD _ K,

- B) 3 ST

^ fD ft

rt ~ !^ •

3 on 3. 11

^ ft OQ ft

O < fT>

< CD a

D CD

OQ ^
C

S*2,
cr 5

a V
5

« ft)

r> c
§ 3-

NJ W I—

0 D. OQ ^
CD I fcr fD

^ S -^ «

o <

2 OQ

M
f?

ST
3

fi)

n
o
o
a

(/)

^ f?

fT 'o

C C fD

& i"

CD
CQ
CQ

CD
CO

CD
CQ
CQ

Q- yi

g* n -I ;i rr

2 OQ 2

S^QQ Al ft) ft

CL ft CO c M

!L-1

5 c S 5
• « P -r

I-

rt- S. OQ OQ

0 1^ croQ

3 3- M
OQ CD

M 22 ftT

«^ w ^ 2
• o —

fD S 3

CD ,2
f&i 3

OQ C

NO- -
E 3 I

O fD
CD "TS-

i-t n
O fD

— OQ

Si c

o
g

a
m

ft)

n n C

c c ►ra

n f^ 3

3^ 3^ CD

CD CD

OQ 0

^ ?

I 2

B) M

IT!

O D-

O- 3

^ C
3 OQ

^ ^ 3 S

O CL S ^
— /n fD

co
O
■o

Co
CD
—1

<;
3"

CQ
cn

tt)
Cr
O

ft CD c

« 2 "

ST ^5 CD

K BJ M

^ ftT E2.

M fD <3

6» CD fD
«■ 3

O w ^

n Q OQ CL 3^

fD OQ o "D CL

5Q fD

< ft)
3- 3

^8
^1

3 ^

3 OQ
O I
< ^

BJ ^
OQ
ft)

n r<

cr C/3 VJJ NJ

3" < i? n

5' 3

c/i 3^ C/3 3

&J X "T" !^

CL fD Ji;

o ^ ^ 2^

p fD 3

B) E. f^
OQ ft) on

3 3 ■

^CL

c »<:

BJ O

o c ji >—

3 3

fD CL N 5* H

3 CD CD ^ 3-

• -t 3 ^ BJ

§ 1

?i n

3 cr. S o

OQ OQ 3 N

^ Si c o
o

cr rD

BJ
OQ

;[ FOOD NEMfS FOR CONSUMERS/SUMMER 1987

The Biotech
Revolution- WhaVs
on the horizon for
meat and poultry?

by Marjorie Davidson

Genetically engineered products to
prevent and treat animal diseases will
soon be commonplace. Cows that pro-
duce 40% more milk and hogs that need
20% less feed to reach market weight
may not be far behind as the biotech
revolution hits the marketplace.

Genetic Engineering— changing the
DNA (hereditary material) of a cell
or of an animal in order to alter its ge-
netic code— has been called the major
scientific revolution of the century
and is destined to leave a lasting impact
on agriculture as we know it today.

A recent survey by the Food and
Dmg Adminstration found that over 92
firms in the United States are rushing
to capitalize on breakthroughs in vet-
erinary genetic engineering— over half
of them entering the field in the last 10
years.

Animal vaccines and antibodies—
proteins in the blood that fight disease —
have been the first genetically engi-
neered products to become commer-
cially marketable. Safer and more
effective than more conventional medi-
cines, these products have already
proven profitable. Last year Molecular
Genetics of Minnetonka, Minn., sold
$1 million worth of new genetically
engineered antibodies for calf scours,
a form of diarrhea that kiUs up to a mil-
hon calves in the United States each
year. The company hopes to market the
first genetically engineered oral vaccines
for livestock in 1988.

Biologies Corp. of Omaha, Neb., is
also profiting from a recently marketed
vaccine against pseudorabies. a neuro-
logical disease that affects swine. With
this vaccine, made by clipping one gene
from the genetic code of the pseudo-
rabies virus, Biologies Corp. expects
to profit from an estimated product
market of $5-$6 million. Use of
the vaccine will save hog producers
$60 million a year.

Other major genetically engineered
products that are expected in the com-
mercial marketplace before the end of
the decade are growth hormones. Now
in the testing stage, these hormones are
being used to increase the production
of meat and milk.

The Monsanto Company is using a
bovine growth hormone at Cornell
University, where daily injections
are causing cows to produce 10 to
40 percent more milk. Anticipating
FDA approval to market the product by
1990. Monsanto predicts the worldwide
market for the growth hormone to be
$1 billion a year.

In University Park. Penn.. daily
growth hormone injections have pro-
duced pigs with less fat and increased
growth over non-injected pigs. Accord-
ing to researchers at Pennsylvania State
University, the hogs need 20 to 35 per-
cent less feed to reach market weight,
which could save pork producers from
$2 to $6 billion annually.

Quotable

Says industry researcher Dr.
Charles Muscoplat, Molecular Genet-
ics Inc., Minnetonka. Minn.: "Genetic
engineering technology is not a
panacea, but it carries the realizable
potential of solving some of the
most difficult problems facing agri-
culture today!'

Government physiologist Dr. Rob-
ert Wall at USD As Agricultural
Research Service in Beltsville, Md.
comments: "We were thrilled that
when seeking to increase growth in
pigs, we successfully transplanted a
growth hormone gene into an em-
bryo and the animal lived. At first
we were afraid to even draw blood
from it for fear something might go
wrong! You must remember that this
technology hasn't developed over-
night. It took the combined efforts
of 7 scientists in 3 different cities
years to produce this one special pig'.'

Yet with every new technology,
criticism abounds. In the case of
Monsanto' s cows, biotechnology nay-
sayers are concerned that the produc-
tion of so much milk will cause the ani-
mals undue stress. The growth hor-
mone testing is being protested by
some farmers as well. Noting that a Cor-
nell University study estimates that the
use of bovine growth hormone will re-
sult in a need for 10 to 25 percent fewer
cows, large-scale farmers fear increased
competition, while some small-scale
farmers are concerned that the develop-
ment could put them out of the dairy
business entirely.

Criticism has been aimed at the U.S.
Department of Agriculture as well. So-
cial activist Jeremy Rifkin of the Foun-
dation on Economic Trends and the
Humane Society of the U.S. challenged
the Department in federal court to stop
gene transfer experiments it has been
undertaking at the Agricultural Research
Service in Beltsville, Md. Calling it a
violation of nature's boundaries by mak-
ing human beings engineers of life,
Rifkin objected to the experiments
which have produced the successful
transplant of a growth hormone gene
into pigs and lambs.

While scientists and social critics
debate the ethics of genetic engineering,
government administrators are tackling
the Herculean task of how to regulate
the new technology.

Although not yet marketed, the
eventual commercialization of geneti-
cally engineered animals as human food
may pose a number of legal and regu-
latory questions that have not been
encountered before.

Daniel D. Jones, of USDA's Office of
Agricultural Biotechnology, points out
a prior experience the federal meat in-
spection program had with two hy-
brid crosses of cattle and buffalo. One
hybrid, called "cattalo," resulted from
the direct cross-breeding of buffalo and
cattle.

USDA determined that since cattalo
have the physical appearance of buffalo
and since buffalo need not be feder-
ally inspected, there was no require-
ment that the "cattalo" be inspected. Yet
a second hybrid, "beefalo," said to

FOOD NEWS FOR CONSUMERS/SUMMER 1987

have resulted from a cross of 3/8ths buf-
falo and 5/8tlis cattle, had the general
physical appearance of domestic cattle
and thus fell under USDA's manda-
tory inspection requirement.

Provisions will also need
to be made about
labeling of food
products pre-
pared from
bioengineered
animals. Lab-
oratories
in the

United Kingdom and West Germany
have produced what geneticists call a
chimera (ki-me-ra), an organism con-
taining tissues of different genetic
origin— in this case, a sheep and
goat. If this chimera were
presented for slaughter,
regulators are asking
themselves, would
the meat be labeled
goat meat, sheep
meat or Just plain
animal meat?

Recognizing that the answers to
these and many other questions may
not be immediately forthcoming. USDA
has published a policy paper dealing
with the specific concerns of veterinary
biotechnology, and has established an
Office of Agriculture Biotechnology to
oversee USDA's role in the evolution of
this new technology.

Will the capability now available to
manipulate genes bring a future of
four-legged chickens and giant cattle?
Not likely, says George E. Seidel. Jr.. of
the Animal Reproduction Laboratory at
Colorado State University at Ft. CoUins.
"It's a common misconception that a
major objective in animal engineering
is to increase the size of animals," Sei-
del says. "In most instances the oppo-
site is true, simply because smaller an-
imals cost less to maintain'.'

So although the technology may
eventually exist to produce sheep with
feathers and hogs with horns, in the
near future at least cows will probably
still look like cows, and chickens like
chickens. It will be the animals' meta-
boUc patterns that will be changed to
make them produce more efficiently.

After all, as Seidel notes, in designing
animals for the future, the most com-
mon objective will be the same as it is
now— to provide more and inexpensive
food.

—Marjohe Davidson, a public affairs
specialist for USDA's Food Safety and
Inspection Service, has written about
public policy matters for 15 years.

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Texts

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "Food news for consumers"

See other formats